MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317423622 · doi:10.3390/app13031306

A Method for Turning a Single Low-Cost Cube into a Reference Target for Point Cloud Registration

2023· article· en· W4317423622 on OpenAlexaff
Ting On Chan, Linyuan Xia, Derek D. Lichti, Xuanqi Wang, Yuezhen Cai, Ming Ho Li

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint cloudComputer visionComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePoint (geometry)Laser scanningComputer graphics (images)MathematicsGeometryLaserOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Target-based point cloud registration methods are still widely used by many laser scanning professionals due to their direct and manipulable nature. However, placing and moving multiple targets such as spheres for registration is a time-consuming and tactical process. When the number of scans gets large, the time and labor costs will accumulate to a high level. In this paper, we propose a flexible registration method that requires the installation of only a low-cost cubical target: a die-like object. The method includes virtual coordinate system construction and two error compensation techniques, in which the non-orthogonality of the scanned facets, along with the unknown sizes of the dice are estimated based on projection geometry and cubical constraints so that three pairs of conjugate points can be accurately identified along the axes of the constructed coordinate systems for the registration. No scan overlap of the facet is needed. Two different low-cost dice (with a volume of 0.125 m3 and 0.027 m3) were used for verifying the proposed method, which shows that the proposed method delivers registration accuracy (with an RMSE discrepancy of less than 0.5 mm for check planes) comparable to the traditional sphere- based method using four to six spherical targets spanning the scene. Therefore, the proposed method is particularly useful for registering point clouds in harsh scanning environments with limited target-setting space and high chances of target interruption.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207